This afternoon the Senate by a vote of 77-23 passed S.1, which contains the Combating BDS Act, encouraging states to pass laws that authorize economic punishments against those who support boycott of Israel. Faiz Shakir, national political director of the ACLU, says:

The Senate just passed a bill that tramples on the 1st Amendment rights of Americans. The House should refuse to take it up.

The ACLU led opposition to the bill and is already moving on to the House. It reports:

Should the House take up similar legislation, we urge members to remove the Combating BDS Act from the package of bills due to the threat it poses to all Americans’ First Amendment right to boycott…

Senators who voted for the bill: we encourage you to read the Constitution, which protects against the McCarthy-era tactics this bill endorses.

I am told there is real hope that the Democratic House will reject the measure.

The 23 Senators who voted against include all likely or announced presidential candidates with the exception of Amy Klobuchar — who reportedly said she opposed the BDS provision but approved other parts of the bill. All the Nays were Democrats except for one Republican, Rand Paul, who warned that the majority is “paranoid” about the Israel lobby. The roll of honor:

The bill is a landmark in anti-Palestinianism. The IMEU relates: “‘It’s disappointing that the Senate has voted to undermine the free speech rights of advocates for Palestinian freedom.’ – Rebecca Vilkomerson, Executive Director of Jewish Voice for Peace.”

J Herbert Nelson II of the Presbyterian Church’s Israel Palestine Mission Network called the bill “unjust” for limiting what more and more people wish to do for Palestinian rights:

A growing number of churches and other faith groups, including the Presbyterian Church (USA), have endorsed time-honored tools like boycotts to avoid profiting from Israel’s abuses of Palestinian rights. In passing the CBA, the Senate is condoning attempts by politicians at the state level to suppress our efforts to be true to our faith and avoid being complicit in the suffering of others.

There was an upside to the vote. “Ugly day for the Senate, but something important happened here: All serious 2020 candidates (Harris, Sanders, Warren, Gillibrand and Booker) bucked AIPAC and voted against this anti-BDS bill,” Ryan Grim tweets. “That tells you a LOT about the politics of Israel in the Democratic Party.”

The Jewish establishment was all for this bill. AIPAC urged its passage. So did Jewish Federations, the leading Jewish philanthropic organizations:

“The Jewish Federations and Israel Action Network applaud the U.S. Senate in taking this important action. Boycotting Israel is bad for business, and the majority of states and a bipartisan supermajority of the Senate agrees,” said William Daroff, Senior Vice President of the Jewish Federations of North America. “The Combating BDS Act (part of S.1) addresses the discriminatory nature of BDS and the ability for states to control their own commerce. We thank the Senate for their leadership on this issue, for ensuring that states can make their own commerce decisions, and for continuing to provide security assistance to Israel. We encourage the House to take up similar legislation in a timely matter. ”

“[T]his bill is a disaster that would undermine America’s commitment to a two-state solution and violate free speech… The fight is far from over. After an uphill battle in the Republican-held Senate, the debate moves to the House of Representatives, where our coalition has a chance to stop this legislation dead in its tracks.”

Alex Kane and Mairav Zsonzein in Vice News also say the vote is a sign of the change coming to the Democratic Party and a test of the House’s commitment to human rights.

“That every Democratic presidential candidate either voted no or did not vote for this law is a sign of a fundamental shift in political calculus on Israel in Washington, and that shift is not favorable to Israel,” said Mike Merryman-Lotze, Middle East program director at the American Friends Service Committee, which advocates for Palestinian rights.

…Instead of seeing Israel as a democracy in a sea of Middle Eastern tyranny, as establishment Democrats and Republicans do, a growing bloc of Democratic members of Congress are willing to criticize Israel’s human rights violations despite the risk of being deemed anti-Semitic.

“The right-wing, extremist government of Benjamin Netanyahu and its apartheid-like policies are at the core of what is alienating Democrats and a growing number of Americans,” said Congresswoman Betty McCollum, a Democrat from Minnesota who authored a bill during the last session of Congress to prevent U.S. military aid to Israel from subsidizing the abuse of Palestinian children. “What has changed is that there are now members of Congress who are not willing to ignore the Israeli government’s destructive actions because they are afraid of losing an election.”

Marco Rubio, sponsor of the bill, has an op-ed in the Times seeking to defend the Senate legislation as not an infringement on free speech rights. He says the bill merely reinforces our government’s foreign policy directives, support for Israel and sanctions against Iran.

Rather, the bill merely clarifies that entities — such as corporations, companies, business associations, partnerships or trusts — have no fundamental right to government contracts and government investment. Similar to federal statutes protecting state governments that choose to divest from companies engaged in business with Sudan and Iran, the bill clarifies that state anti-B.D.S. laws meeting its criteria are not inconsistent with federal policy. By empowering states to counter discriminatory economic warfare targeting Israel, this bill also reinforces American policy insisting that only direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiations can resolve that conflict.

The one Republican to oppose the law, Rand Paul gave a stirring floor speech yesterday saying that the right to boycott is fundamental to American political action: Rosa Parks boycotted in Montgomery and the Boston Tea Party boycotted to found the United States. And he said the “lobby” strikes fear in senators.

There is a teacher in Texas who is Muslim. I think she teaches autistic or special needs kids. She is a contractor. She was asked to sign a statement saying that she would never boycott goods made in Israel. Well, she objects to some of the policies, I presume, on the West Bank. I don’t agree with her, but that is a fundamentally American thing–to be able to object. Should we have a law that says you can’t boycott your government and that you can’t boycott your government’s policy? To me, that is a real danger…

[B]oycotting or protesting is something so fundamentally American, so fundamentally associated with the First Amendment that even if we don’t like what you are boycotting, even if we don’t like what you are saying, that in America we allow that to happen because that is what freedom of speech is about…

Boycotting is speech. I went to a Baptist college. I remember when I was in college that the Baptist women of the Southwest Baptist Convention didn’t like pornography being out in front at the store where kids could view it. Do you know what they did? They marched. They didn’t hurt anybody. They didn’t commit violence. They did nonviolent protests by marching in front of the utility stores until–guess what–because of the economic boycott and the bad press, the people put the pornographic magazines behind the counter, and only adults were allowed to buy them and look at them. That is from a boycott.

We boycotted English tea to found a country.

Does anybody remember the boycotts in Montgomery? Rosa Parks didn’t like the fact that she was being separated and told to sit in the back of the bus, so African Americans from around the country but definitely across Alabama and Montgomery boycotted the bus system.

Are we here to say that we are going to forbid boycotting, that you can’t do business with the government? Here is the problem. People say: Oh, it is a privilege to do business with the government. What if you are a physician and half of your business is with the government? What if you are a nurse? Half of the healthcare in our country is paid for by the government. What if you are a teacher and you work in the public schools? Are we going to ask all of these people to take a litmus test that they are not going to boycott or protest against their government’s policy? What kind of country would we live in? Yet it is groupthink around here. Everybody is so paranoid and saying: Oh, we can’t object to this lobby. Because this lobby is so powerful, we can’t object to them. Look, it isn’t about the ideas; it is about the freedom of speech.

Why would a foreign country who shares America’s values want to gut America’s freedom of speech? IT WOULD NOT! And why would most US Senators knuckle under to a foreign government who is trying to gut the 1st Amendment? Because, as Rand Paul says plainly, they’re AFRAID!

Zionist Mona Charen recently said “What is anti-Semitism except for a vast conspiracy theory? Right? That the Jews somehow control the banks, the newspapers, the centers of power, and so forth.” I would ask, is the US Senate not a well-known center of power? Are most Senators not well-known to be beholden to their campaign financers? Is not Senator Rubio, the sponsor of this bill, not well-know to be beholden for his entire career to Israeli lobbyist Sheldon Adelson? Are Senators not influenced by the good or bad press bestowed upon them by the mainstream media, a media that consistently covers up Israel’s 70 year campaign of terrorism, murder, and robbery inflicted on the innocent indigenous people of Palestine? Do American citizens not have a right to be concerned about a foreign government that exerts such a degree of control over their Senate that it will even attempt to gut the Bill of Rights under the flimsiest of pretexts? Following Charen’s definition, is it possible that what is called “anti-Semitism” is primarily not an objection to all Jews per se, but an objection to the unauthorized power of a few?

Truth may be a defense against a charge of slander or libel in a court of law, but it isn’t a defense against a charge of anti-Semitism in the court of US media/politics. Facts have a “well-known” anti-Zionist bias.

Zionism’s status in this regard isn’t entirely unique–there are other shibboleths beyond reproach or examination–but it is among the most powerful.

“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called on Google, Facebook and Twitter to do more to monitor and remove such material.

“The Internet firms have defended their policies, saying they have sufficient protection against online incitement and rejecting perceptions of political interference.

“We rely on the YouTube Community to flag videos that they think violate our Community Guidelines,” the spokesperson for Google said.

“Video flagged on YouTube is reviewed 24 hours a day and, if material violates our policies, it is removed quickly.”

“The foreign ministry has also announced a new office to monitor and flag inflammatory media online. The body, which will begin operation early next year, seeks to highlight provocative materials in real time.

“Last month, an Israeli NGO launched a lawsuit against Facebook over allegedly failing to remove pages that encouraged the killing of Jews.”

This discussion made me curious to learn what Wikipedia says about the Nakba. A search on that term led me to the Wikipedia article on “the 1948 Palestinian Exodus,” a term unfamiliar to me, though it does have a Biblical ring. We are informed that it is also called the Nakba, and repeatedly told that the Palestinians “left or fled.” I infer that the editors use this formulation to leave a certain ambiguity about who did what and why.

We are told, “The precise number of refugees, many of whom settled in refugee camps in neighboring states, is a matter of dispute . . . [and] The causes are also a subject of fundamental disagreement between historians.”

it is absolutely irrelevant, because the fact that they are not allowed to return completes the ethnic cleansing. So all Palestinian refugees who fled or were expelled were post facto expelled.

Of course for the same reason they are not allowed to return. It’s all about demographics and faking a Jewish majority which is only the result of ethnic cleansing. This is called “Jewish democracy”: Jewish majority ruling through expulsion of the Nonjewish majority.

I just watched the video and in general, I am pleased with what I saw and heard. At long last, the well documented suffering of the indigenous Palestinians at the hands of racist/fascistic Zionist Jews of foreign origin is being discussed openly in the American media, on university campuses and in homes, thanks in large measure to the growing support of America’s most important demographic – youth, including Jews.

It’s only going to get worse for the Zionists in America and the western world (check out Canada where the majority of its citizens are now pro-Palestinian.) The ugly truth can only be supressed for so long . Americans have been played for suckers by “Israel,” especially tax payers who for over 70 years, have funded its crimes with the complicity of bought and paid for, gutless politicians.

I almost fell off my chair while hearing David Urban spew forth his lies regarding Hamas. As any curious person can soon discover, Hamas has long since and repeatedly agreed to accept a state based on the pre-1967 war borders. “Israel” has constantly ignored these overtures.

As for Mia Love, her ignorance of the subject is shocking, but not surprising. She described “Israel” as a bastion against terrorism. Apparently, she is not familiar with or chooses to ignore its litany of accelerating crimes committed against the Palestinians and other Arabs that have been ignored by the U.S. and are and were (e.g., 9/11) the major cause of justified enmity against the U.S. and the resulting violent blowback.

“Israel” is rotting within and ever increasing numbers of young Jews are seeing Zionism for the racist lie it is. Time, demographics and the thrust of 21st century geopolitics are with the Palestinians. All so predictable.

@Misterioso, Hamas has long since and repeatedly agreed to accept a state based on the pre-1967 war borders.

What a joke. Yes, Hamas has repeatedly agreed to accept what you claim – in exchange for nothing at all. No peace with Israel, no end to claims, the same insistence on their non-existent RoR, etc..

Hamas is completely willing to accept a new and improved base from which to continue their attacks on Israel and pursue their vision of a Palestine from the river to sea. Now why in the world would Israel not think that was a great idea?

mondonut: “Yes, Hamas has repeatedly agreed to accept what you claim – in exchange for nothing at all. No peace with Israel, no end to claims, the same insistence …”

78% of Palestinie is nothing at all? Sharing Jerusalem is nothing at all? What does Israel actually have to offer, which is beyond what international and human rights law allready demand? Please elaborate.

Ireland always does the right thing, when it comes to human rights and the Palestinians.

Maybe also because the toxic Israeli lobbies have not spread it’s poison over there yet, nor bought the loyalty of politicians, like they have in the US. The Irish should reject them, and avoid them like the plague.

Amigo, you are right, Ireland must be doing something right. It has shown Israel the door and will not be intimidated by them, and has avoided being controlled by the zionists. What else can they do now except use the “anti-semitic card”, when they know they can’t get their way with Ireland.

I went from thinking there were too many presidential candidates to thinking there weren’t enough to kill the Senate bill. (A) Incumbents that want to win a presidential primary (B) Incumbents that don’t want to put a target on their back for The Lobby (77 in all).

That difference by 23 is, in part at least, to the fact that openly attacking freedom of speech is still taboo for a lot of people. That is not necessarily linked to Palestine, even though some may be. The discussion is neglecting that extremely important aspect .

“discriminatory economic warfare”
Marcobot uses that phrase five times in this piece.

I liked this part:

Similar to federal statutes protecting state governments that choose to divest from companies engaged in business with Sudan and Iran, the bill clarifies that state anti-B.D.S. laws meeting its criteria are not inconsistent with federal policy.

In other words,
Existing federal statutes: OK for state governments to wage discriminatory economic warfare against Sudan and Iran.
This bill: OK for state governments to punish entities that wage discriminatory economic warfare against Israel.

It was only a couple of years ago that a number of entities, including the state of California, were waging discriminatory economic warfare against the state of North Carolina, a fellow democracy. Too bad for North Carolina that its representatives do not have as much influence in Congress as Israel does.

True, we can still hope that even the current Supreme Court will draw the line. But even if it does, the political branches remain shamefully subservient to AIPAC. Even there, two new Representatives show the power of having a voice at the table. There’s really no substitute. At last, some substantive debate. Possibly not much action in time to help any Palestinians, but at least a step forward for American democracy.

from WaPo:

“The first two Muslim-American women in Congress are forcing the Democratic Party to confront a growing call from some of their younger members to take a more progressive position on Middle Eastern politics, especially on the creation of a Palestinian state.”

It boggles my mind seeing the hypocrisy in this bill. The US is the most prolific BDS proponent in this world.

BDS=Economic Sanctions.

The US imposes more economic sanctions (BDS) on other Nations, Iran, Syria, Iraq, and now Venezuela being the most well known examples.

Americans have to question the Israeli practice of providing all expenses paid trips to Israel for Members of Congress to hear only the Israeli version of the current conflict with Palestinians. That has to account for the fact the only bi-partisanship in Congress is on issues affecting Israel as this vote demonstrates.

@amigo
“Citizen /gamal , if you plug in “cnn the lead jake tapper 5/02/19” it still comes up with the video”

Not sure quite what is going on with this You Tube clip. I managed to access it about an hour or so ago and scrolled forward as you suggested to the discussion on BDS. Having watched the relevant segment I then posted or rather attempted to post my comment and for whatever reason a server error popped up. Have since not been able to access the clip . I wonder why ??So here goes again.

The “discussion on the BDS” and the anti – BDS bill starts with the black lady panellist basically talking about the the need for a more “nuanced” debate when it comes to Israel. The bald bloke almost ferally and as if in automatic on cue mode comes straight back accusing her of supporting Hamas and “terrorism” without any attempt to address the points she is raising. She then understandably tries to point out despite his Dershowitz like filibustering that what she had said had nothing to do with supporting terrorism or Hamas and he then continues to interrupt the points she is trying to make by parroting(literally) Hamas squakk Terrorism squakk.
The other black lady is then given the opportunity to speak and her contribution is arguably the most grotesque and gruesome of the entire segment = Israel medicine technology America`s ally only democracy etc blah blah puke.

The white lady panellist is given very little opportunity to speak but I got the impression that she was siding with the first black lady in terms of supporting the need for this more nuanced approach.

The debate in itself was on balance IMHO a positive thing because it highlighted the fact that discussions on the I/P issue on American MSM are now incorporating and including panellists and opinions at odds with the standard pro-Israel group think which has been the case in the past.

On the negative side it can be despairing and cringeworthy watching and listening to individuals who are outwardly logical and structured in their arguments implode into being delusional hypocritical d…heads when it comes to defending the only Racist Apartheid Colony in the Middle East.

“The other black lady is then given the opportunity to speak and her contribution is arguably the most grotesque and gruesome of the entire segment = Israel medicine technology America`s ally only democracy etc blah blah puke.”

Yes, that’s not an unrealistic take on her contribution to the panel discussion–this black women assumed any attack on anti-BDS legislation is not to be quesioned.

The Combating BDS Act of 2019 is overreach by AIPAC, and unlike the state bills that it encourages, the federal bill doesn’t actually do anything. However, it stokes resentment against the lobby in the Democratic base and awakens the previously unbothered editorial boards in our newspapers. It underscores the pernicious influence of Israel in our democracy. The backlash is clearly seen in the Reader Picks comments to Rubio’s NYT op-ed. For AIPAC, a Pyrrhic victory.

Maybe–this assumes we have enough informed and courageous Americans willing to risk their jobs and careers to support Palestinian basic rights, and will point out we lavish free $ on Israel with no strings attached, so they can abuse the Palestinians.

@Emet
Have read Rubio`s piece which is classic Ziotwist and Ziocontortion.As CKG has said the reader`s comments are illuminating and do reinforce the view that unqualified support for Israel is starting irritate a lot of Americans in this case specifically when it is seen as undermining First Amendment rights. Comments can also unearth hidden gems. Yes Sheldon Adelson is now seen as Rubio`s primary “banker/backer. That`s the same Israeli Firster Adelson as in:
“In July 2010 Adelson, a U.S. citizen, told an Israeli group that he regretted that he had worn an American army uniform rather than an Israeli one”https://israelpalestinenews.org/watch-sheldon-adelson-regretted-he-served-in-the-u-s-army-rather-than-the-israeli-military/
One of the comments referred to Rubio`s previous ZioPatriarch a seriously creepy billionare Israeli Firster by the name of Norman Braman who said:

“I worry about that because I really believe that a strong America is the greatest factor which insures a great Israel and a sustaining Israel. A weak America poses a threat to the future of Israel. So I concern myself about the United States, our economy, and the general situation in this country.”https://www.thenation.com/article/meet-marco-rubios-far-right-neocon-donors/
He is talking about the “threats” posed by a weak American economy and bingo surprise surprise his first priority is not the welfare of his “fellow” American citizens or America`s ability to defend itself but rather the dangers it might create for his country of First Loyalty = Israel

It would appear that the American public excepting the screwball Evangelicals are slowly wakening up to the fact that their country has been for years a puppet of the ZioRegime and that these wealthy Ziodonors are effectively Fifth Columniss.

First draft of statement from AIPAC.
For use by Senators 24-100.
Still to be edited, cleaned up.

From the Office of Senator [name here]:

This bill has nothing to do with America’s freedom of speech, or the 1st Amendment, or the Bill of Rights, or the Constitution. None of those things are even mentioned in the bill. The entire purpose of this bill is something altogether different. Israel would never want to harm Americans’ freedom of speech. [Maybe not mention that; may trigger thoughts of USS Liberty.]

This bill is to ensure that our MOST valued ally is protected from our citizens who want to attack it with protests. The sole and entire purpose of this bill is to protect Israel, nothing more. No harm is meant to Americans in any way.

That warning by George Washington about the dangers of “special relationships” with other nations doesn’t apply here because Israel is special. Israel is merely following God’s orders. The Torah specifies in detail that the Jews will invade this land and kill “everything that breathes”. The Palestinians not accepting this reality has made it necessary to terrorize, kill, and rob them to achieve God’s goal. [Find a better way to phrase that last part.]

Since America is a Judeo-Christian nation, it is our God-given duty to help Israel. This law only allows American state governments to boycott American citizens who boycott Israel. It’s just an eye for an eye. If you want to boycott Israel, you lose a lot of work opportunities. [Rephrase that last part.]

I am in no way influenced by the network of AIPAC donors who helped me get elected. I sincerely believe that Israel is our most valuable ally, a bulwark of democracy and decency, and a lamp unto the nations.

Support Mondoweiss’s independent journalism today

Mondoweiss brings you the news that no one else will. Your tax-deductible donation enables us to deliver information, analysis and voices stifled elsewhere. Please give now to maintain and grow this unique resource.